>> what we saw in syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. it defies any code of morality. let me be clear. the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent i standards by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. >> latest there from senator john kerry and the actions of the syrian forces in the administration's view.

he says the use of chemicals is many question when the united states will act with force. force,say beyond any strategy is needed on syria. i want to get your reactions this morning again to the situation in syria and what the secretary of state said yesterday in what the u.s. should do and whether congress may or may not be involved as well as the international community. here are the lines on the screen. here is the front page of "the washington post" this morning. obama weighing limiting strike

on syria. they say the president is wearing a strike syria that would be a limited scope and duration, designed to serve as punishment for serious use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent while keeping the u.s. out of deeper involvement in that country possible war. this according to senior administration officials. the timing of such an attack which would probably last no more than two days and involve -- lawrence cruise missiles and involve see launch cruise is dependent on three factors. completion of an intelligence report assessing syrian government culpability in last week's chemical attack, ongoing consultation with allies in congress, and a determination of the justification under international law. scott wilson joins us by phone now. he is white house bureau chief for the washington post. good morning. insight can you put forth this morning guest: on the administration's thinking it is notbut syria

only a matter of if like you and tot how and when what extent they're going to do this. if it is going to be a symbolic punishment as we reported this morning or is this going to be some and that is decisive on the ground? obviously resident aside in syria have not responded to deterrence before. the administration argued for some time that even an investigation into last allegations of chemical weapons used was a deterrent in itself and had kept him from using further chemical weapons. that turned out not to be the case. i am really looking for a couple of days of some sort of sea- based missile strikes this is most likely not going to have a decisive effect on the war the ground. it really depends on president obama who is pragmatic about these kinds of issues.

he will say what is the point of this if it is not going to change things. you are member that is an echo of years ago when he asked for a ander you an authorization a fuller set of options from officials and the more cautious once he originally got [indiscernible] he sees no reason for the u.s. to put its nose in where it is not wanted he writes. neither side is our ally and both sides hold us in low regard. why for all that is holy would we go there? what is the administration's argument? what are they saying to each other, to congress and to others around the world about why a strike? guest: there are a couple of different ways to answer the question. one is, if you heard secretary kerry yesterday. if this is a moral obscenity,

does united states want to stand by and watch these being carried out. that is a moral argument. surrey obviously borders israe israel's security is connected to the united states and israel is deeply concerned about what is concerned -- about what is occurring to their north. at the same time look to the south and egypt which is also in a state of no terry confrontation with demonstrators , a temporary military government. of enormoustself is american national security interest. you have to extreme situations taking place there right now. without some sort of american or international involvement with americans laying more of a backseat or logistical role, things don't get that are, they get worst when the world turns a way. your colleague in the

post, will england writes about the stance in moscow. the headline says attack on syria would be disaster according to russia. can you tell us more? guest: this is part of the ongoing confrontation. the ongoing confrontation with russia over syria. obviously, president obama canceled a planned summit meeting with vladimir putin in moscow which would have been a couple of weeks from now. not directly over our problems with russia and syria, but in large parts because of russia and syria. obviously there is not you and sanction to proceed with the military confrontation rate again, i will mention libya. the russians did support that operation and then felt that they were betrayed to some

degree when the united states instead of simply protect in benghazi took the military campaign further to eventually oust more market off he. the russians say they will not repeat that mistake and therefore we will have a very hard time working to the u.n. to have any kind of support for military action in syria as a weult of that trade host: are talking here about syria. take us back to congress and capitol hill. what specifically have congressional leaders to say? it has been arranged. week andaw late last of course the images that emerged from that have certainly stepped up the rhetoric from congress. congress is out of session so you're hearing a lot less than you might otherwise when the government is in town. at the same time you have john mccain and lindsey graham all

calling for fuller involvement. john mccain has for some time talked about arming certain rebels. that is back on the table although it is difficult to know where that would lead given the diverse makeup of the syrian rebel groups and their own political thinking and commitment to democracy. congress will get back from its break soon. i think we will hear a lot more, but before even congress returns we're going to see at least some form of military strike. to the: so finally back white house. what you're going to be looking for in the next hours and days echo >> guest: really>> this is probably very specific diplomacy . the questions that you began why, howen, where,

.xtensive was david cameron the germans are resistant to any kind of engagement so there'll be some talk with resident merkel in germany. that kind of diplomacy leading likely leadl most to overnight strikes against syria in insulations. thanks a lot for your time and further insight, i appreciated. exactly twon minutes. first here's the secretary of state from yesterday. for the last several days, president obama and his entire national security team have been reviewing the situation in syria. today i want to provide an update on our efforts as we consider our response to the use of chemical weapons.

weekwe saw in syria last shocked the conscience of the world heritage defies any code of morality and let me be clear. the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent why standards by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. by any standard it is inexcusable and despite the excuses and equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable. the meaning of this attack goes beyond the conflict in syria itself. that conflict has artie brought so much terrible suffering. this is about the large-scale indiscriminate use of weapons that civilized world long ago decided must never be used at all. shared evennviction by countries that agree on little else. that thea clear reason

world has banned entirely the use of chemical weapons. there's a reason the international community has set a clear standard and why many countries have taken major steps to eradicate these weapons. >> a couple of headlines from around the country. herald" says a moral obscenity. the "the pittsburgh post- gazette" obama escalates jambi. -- escalates drumbeats. syria moves closer to military strike. this particular photo is a view and chemical weapons specialist visiting a hospital in syria that is treating the tums of an apparent gas attack.

call sydney pollack, louisiana. go ahead you are on. caller: we don't care about people getting gas. run any deals on the sex the of the children who suffered agent orange in vietnam. off sincery is better we have been bombing them over the last 20 years? >> welcome to the show, tony. uest: >> >> guest: it seems we really don't care about those people over there. we do care about countries like

israel. i care about the country of israel also. i don't care about the government of israel. i believe -- one minute we're calling all those folks over there terrorists, the next minute we care about them so much. this needs to stop because it is just going to backfire on this country and all hell is going to break loose in the middle east and we are going to be responsible for. it needs to stop. >> guest: listen, i teach at the presidents on the modern here in new york. i want to bring out a point, just a commonsense point. martin luther king who believed ,n nonviolence, if esau obama he would turn over in his grave.

this is the situation. we are sending 100 houston male soldiers and female soldiers to afghanistan, the world's leading producer of heroin at the cost one .25 billion dollars a year. when president obama gives a speech to university, how my students could be sent on scholarships, and i'm talking about minorities. his own african-americans. that money could he spent so 1,000,002 hundred 50,000 dollars. this is a religious war that is going on between the sunnis and the shia. the smallest group in here is the saudi's. the saudi's are funding these insurgents going in there and now all of a sudden they said oh that is too much money for us. we will get the united states to

go in and try to bail us out. -- you can solve a political war, i have a question on that. a tweet this is morning. it seems our politicians are totally impotent when it comes to middle east and scared to take decisions and take actions. we will see how things play out today and in the coming days. at c- twitter comments span wj. kerry cites clear evidence of chemical weapon use. it says in the coming days officials say the nation's intelligence agencies will disclose information to bolster their case that chemical weapons were used by mr. suggs forces. the information could include so-called signals intelligence -- intercepted radio or telephone calls between syrian military commanders. the official said it was conceivable that action could be averted by germanic turnabout on

the part of the assad government or by the russian government the has been supporting it. times goes on to write that although the u.s. was consulting with allies the administration said they had largely abandoned hope of obtaining any authorization for action in the un's to cure the town shall given the all but certain veto from russia. other signs of? in some 20 military response took shape on monday. british prime minister cameron that short vacation to deal with ministers of britain and turkey suggested that bypassing the security council was an option trade next call is from mary down in key largo florida. hi there >> guest: right.>> all it's down. i think we should get rid of

john kerry. i think he is a poor secretary of state. >> host: why? >> guest: i think we should stay out of syria. now i guess that's it. c w: >> let's hear from texas, a republican caller. >> caller: i think all these issues locked together. it seems like if you go back every time there is a new conflict we don't pay attention reality.ysical next month obamacare kicks in. the last thing they want people to do is start really understanding that they are hitting you in your wallet. we the taxpayers are paying for this crap. as the man said earlier, we are using depleted uranium that is causing irritable bowel syndrome

and god knows what else it is doing to the body. useo, we don't need to military force and no more military-industrial complex. get past all this they believe this and they believe that. there's always going to be lunatics. but they want to take it away from everybody. this is about money, that is all t is about it >> host: we should ask for a declaration if we feel so strongly than trade meaning an attack on syria. there should be an international response not a u.s. response writes another viewer this morning. over to twitter, the world cannot accept the use of chemical weapons. here's the front page of "usa today." taking aim at syria is the headline. they have a graphic with some

information about what type of missile might be used. a cruise missile with a maximum range of 1500 miles. the length is 20.3 feet. it weighs about 3300 pounds and the warhead is about a thousand pounds. to the right of the shot is the story about the secretary of state, but specifically a passage about congress. the white house started reaching out to congressional leaders monday including house leaders john boehner. the speaker is made clear that before any action is taken, there must be meaningful consultation with embers of congress as well as fairly defined object is an a broader strategy to achieve stability. joe, baltimore, on the line for democrats. >> >> guest: i feel we're being

baited into a conflict in the middle east. baited by israel. , when benjamin netanyahu came to united states he is the one who first started speaking about iran. later on in syria, let me put it when nuclear weapons or these chemical weapons were used in syria, 100 or so people died. that didn't bother us then. if you would recall, israel said they were going to send someone and some people and to secure the chemical weapons in syria. and they did, but we never heard anything more about what happened with is weapons that they secured. that is when the hundred and some people in syria died trade arer on we find out there 1000 or so people. they're really trying to bait us.

israel doesn't care about us in the united states. it is always these conflicts, egypt, libya, syria. what do they want to go to the one more american blood? we never talk too much about israel. so let's talk about them. here's another tweet. why is it immoral insanity to kill 1000 series of gas but not a moral obscenity to kill 100,000 syrians with bullets and bombs? the "usa today" the headline says assad's regime can withstand a limited hit. it would change the balance of power in serious civil war bring about a resident obama goal of regime change. analysts and rebel leaders agree. hasa's president assad

behind him russia's veto of the you and your it iran and hezbollah. the u.s. worries about arming rate so they can withstand a limited hit says the headline read aaron, you are online now from minneapolis. if united states is ,onsidering attacking syria they're completely out of their minds. syria and iran have a mutual defense agreement and if we attract syria, iran has stated that it will not tolerated at all. china have also said that the united states will not under any circumstance interfere their. this is one road we may not be able to turn around

on once we start going down it ery >> guest: this is a ploy: and a distraction with the u.s. government to keep american people from taking a look at the problems going on in the united states. obamacare, it is a distraction, and its attempt to do regime change and to get into fight, wehould not should not go into syria. thank you. usa today opinion headline. the opposing view on this page comes from christopher preble of the cato institute. the truth is that not even the united states can solve serious problems.

the deeply dysfunctional syrian status and not some outsiders have the tools to repair. cruise missiles launched from ships and submarines won't persuade the opposition to unite around a common goal. nor are they likely to cause assad supporters to capitulate and go in their lot with the rebels. thise wall street journal morning, they write that the problem is assad. they write here that the worst response would be lobbing a few cruise missiles from a standoff distance. that attack would kill off a few syrians in coding some civilians, but it is hard to see the strategic goal. it would be consequences to the use of chemical weapons. assad would not stop his killing. "the wall street journal." i think we ought to stay out of syria and any place in the far east. it seems like we forgot about iraq with its weapons of mass

destruction. farces just a another that the people have built is weapons here in the united states that lobbied the congress. it seems like we can afford to build millions of dollars with , how come we can't find our education -- fund our education and benefits for the elderly are everyone to take everything from americans and give it to warmongers. good morning, how are you sir? i think we should stay out of it or they are surrounded by huge arab nations with gigantic armies that we have funded and sold arms to. let the arabs take care of syria. that's it.

thank you. host: hello david. that is the same thing they use for saddam hussein. we need to understand that we have things here in this country . chemical war is a terrible thing, but we have detroit bankrupt, we have illegal aliens, we have so many things in this country that he to be taking care of her it would don't seem to have the time to take care of it hurt i say we should deal with the issues in this place and then we go out and help others. that is all i have got to say. here's what a couple of senators had to say. now is the time for decisive action. the u.s. must rally our friends and actions to take limited to return actions and serious.

using standoff weapons without boots on the ground and at minimal risk to our men and women in uniform, we can sit if you can lead assad's airpower and listed missile capabilities and help establish safe areas on the ground. john mccain, lindsey graham, both republicans and united states senate. we have a democrat on the line now. surely from ermine ham alabama -- surely from birmingham alabama. uest: >> brought: assad has not anybody over your to kill us, but our american congress is killing and our american government is killing people right here in the united states. let's fix home before we try to

spread the democratic process abroad which they are not keeping up with good thank you. one viewer says he still can't tell the good guys from the bad guys in syria. can't from poolesville maryland. would you like to say? i agree with most of your caller's this morning heard my sentiments are that we should stay out of syria. at this point i don't think we have a lot of choice. i think president obama has boxed himself in here. when the white house is saying up and down the table, i don't think the option to do nothing is now off the table because the president has gone out and crossed a red line for game changers. he will look for a week. it will hurt our foreign policy for years to come. i don't think we have a choice.

that was ken from maryland. >> host: rock team, capital heights maryland. independent. good morning. the united states has left a lot of deep pleated uranium in iraq. -- a lot of depleted uranium in iraq. has put up the charge that the obama administration is guilty of a crime. is reportingedia this. all of them are guilty of war crimes. condoleezza rice rice, rumsfeld,

all of them. these are criminals that are running our country right now. the media is turning the other way and pretending it didn't happen. you can go to what it all means.com and read the report of all these war criminals and leadership positions in our country. host: we have about 13, maybe 15 minutes left for this segment. we're asking you your thoughts about syria this morning and what the u.s. response should be. as you can see on the screen, secretary kerry yesterday said the use of chemical weapons in syria was a moral obscenity. you can talk about that quote, or the international role, lines are on the screen there. and parta, new jersey is on the line now. richard, a democrat. caller: hey there. host: hey there. caller: hi, hi, yes. it seems to me this is all about

the use of chemical weapons. i would think the best thing to do would be issue an ultimatum to syria to turn over all chemical weapons to the united nations in 48 hours or face elimination of the regime. i mean this could work in that we would eliminate, eliminate the chemical weapons without actually firing a shot and getting involved. that would be on the table and it would be in assad's court to figure out what to do. host: ok. richard there from new jersey. "washington post" they write the u.s. can't dictate the outcome in syria and it would be foolish to send ground troops in an effort to do so. but by combining military pressures with training, weapon supplies and diplomacy it could exercise considerable influence. the military measures could include destroying forces involved in chemical weapons use

and elements of the syrian air force that have been yawsed to target civilians as well as helping to carve out a safe zone for rebels and the civilian populations they are seeking to protect. keith, alexandria, pennsylvania now. republican. hi. caller: i don't know when this country is ever going to learn, every war seems to be a good reason to be to go in and kill the people we have in the military and come back with no arms, no legs, everything like that. the cost of it just tremendous, and in the end, they will never appreciate us. if we do, or if we don't. thank you. host: steven, lancaster, south carolina, independent, hi. caller: hello. host: good morning, steven. caller: good morning. i would like to say a few things. first of all, i completely respect and support all of our armed forces. they deserve our recommendation and our appreciation. having said that i want to bring

them all back home. the middle east has been in conflict for over 2,000 years. now for us to step in and say that even in recent decades that we are going to start saying something about this, it's completely irrelevant. i believe we should have all of our troops, all of our engineers, all of our people focused exactly on what we need, which is to rebuild the infrastructure of our own country. we have bridges that are failing, buildings that are inept. we have textile mills that have shutdown. we have entire cities that have completely been sold out to other countries, because it's cheaper, and doing so, we have destroyed entire communities, and whole neighborhoods have

just become vacant lots where there is no more industry, there is no more money to be made to support our own people. so if we are able to forget about trying to rule other countries, so to speak, i don't mean to sound so arrogant. but that's what i watch on the news every day. host: ok. in case you missed the top of the program, here's another look at secretary kerry from yesterday. >> for the last several days, president obama and his entire national security team have been reviewing the situation in syria. and today i want to provide an update on our efforts as we consider our response to the use of chemical weapons. what we saw in syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. it defies any code of morality. let me be clear.

the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children, innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. by any standard it is inexcusable and despite what ome have manufactured, it is undeniable. the meaning of this attack goes beyond the conflict in syria itself. that conflict has already brought so much terrible suffering. this is about the large scale indiscriminate use of weapons that the civilized world long ago decided must never be used at all. a conviction shared, even by countries that agree on little else. there is a clear reason that the world has banned entirely the use of chemical weapons. there is a reason the international community has set a clear standard and why many countries have taken major steps

to eradicate these weapons. host: now we have dillard from elgin, south carolina on the line for democrats. hi dillard. caeri. host: hi dillard. caller: hey, how's it going. host: good? caller: hello? host: yes, you're on the air. can you hear us? caller: yes. host: ok, turn the sound down on your set and you can speak. caller: ok. host: go ahead, dillard. caller: my main concern is all the people in washington they're going to put our young people in harm's way and can't make a decision. we got a lot of problems going on here. why do we have to take the lead? why can't someone else take the lead? they can't make a decision on simple budgets, they can put our young people in harms' way? that's what concerns me. host: ok, carl on the line now from pennsylvania. independent, hey, carl. caller: hey, how you doing?

listen, i'm thinking here the american taxpayers better be very careful because what we're talking about doing is really the tip of the iceberg, there's 5 or 30 countries. the continent of african is a pretty big place. they all have the same type of problem, going into syria, next thing you know we'll be all those countries that visited and waved our hands at and we'll take care of your problem, because we get in there we'll be in there for a hundred years. thank you very much. host: omar from indiana, independent. good morning. caller: yes, i am so happy to finally hear all the calls that are coming in from the american people who in 2003 were all shouting u.s.a., u.s.a. when the news media led them to go into this thing in iraq when they destroyed that country. more specifically, i hope the

american people, number one, begun to really zero in on israel's role in this whole thing, and secondly, it looks like the american people are paying very close attention to the news media, how they create his er thea in the mind of the public. chemical weapons, chemical weapons, even throe the throat slitters, these so-called rebels that i call throat slitters are the ones using the chemical weapons. then the american news media switches gear and goes from hysteria to sympathy. we have to do something, to get us drug into the middle east. which again, israel is a very important part. once the news media goes to sympathy, the next act is to try to get the american people to support them in the crimes that they're getting ready to commit in destroying syria like they did iraq, afghanistan. so i'm so happy to hear the american people are beginning to see through the lies and

misinformation and propaganda that's being thrown from them at our congressman, our news media, our think tank talking heads. the american people are beginning to see that israel is not the cause of world war iii, certainly the financial destruction of the united states. thank you. host: some more news this morning. jack lou, the treasury secretary raises debt limit pressure, this in the financial times. the u.s. will run out of boring authority in mid-october and sent a letter to the speaker of the house john boehner to explain that one of the many issues when congress faces when they come back into session. go ahead new jersey. caller: hi, i'm generally anti-war, but i just feel like e use of chemical weapons is unacceptable. i think we should at least take out the storage depots, if possible, with support of the world community.

i understand all the callers, how they don't want us getting involved in international things because we do need to fix up our country. but you know, the rebels in syria are a mixed bag. we don't really know who we are so i don't think forces should be used at all. host: david from glen cove, new york. caller: good morning. i've been listening and i agree with a lot of the callers but i have a few comments that i'd like to make. one is that i'd like to know where the reporters got their information. i'd like to find out why barack obama hasn't done anything with the red line. why they got the opportunity to use these chemical weapons, why they're storing them. how come our country with all the information and satellite imagery we don't see them moving them around, we don't see them firing them off. we don't have any military in

the area that could have stopped it and prevented it. i really believe is barack obama is that interested in changing the middle east, maybe he should run for president over there. host: couple minutes left. jerry? go ahead, jerry. caller: hi. host: hi. caller: i just wanted to comment on the whole syria issue here. i think that we're really etting into a bad situation in syria. i think that -- host: keep going. you there? i think we lost you. next call. where are you calling from? caller: redding, california. host: is it thomas? caller: yes. host: go ahead, please. caller: hi. well, i don't think you guys have ever seen such unanimous agreement on this syrian thing. host: tell us more.

caller: well, we have such limited options when it comes to syria. in fact we have no options. if they use chemical weapons and we send in cruise missile strikes, what's going to happen? we'll be blamed for collateral damage and then get sucked into the sinkhole of syria. i just can't believe, i mean syria is destroying syria. if you've seen these pictures on tv, they have no infrastructure left, everybody's just shooting at themselves. and we're going to get involved in this? seems a little strange to me. host: back to the "wall street journal," why obama is being pulled into syria, simply put, iran. the influence of iran there is causing the u.s. to be involved at this point and he makes the point that the u.s. might be wanting to make a point to iran by responding to syria. nest call, john from georgia.

hey, john. caller: yes, good morning. want to make a couple of quick points. number one is there haven't been any credible evidence to say the syrian government was responsible for the chemical weapons attack there. but there are a lot of indications that i've read that it was the rebels who actually launched these attacks, a provocation for u.s. coming in and bombing the country and bringing down. and one last point is i think it's a very, it's very telling when you have 90% of the country against going to war in syria, but the democrats, republicans, the president is ignoring that. host: thanks for calling. next call, robert. go right ahead, please. caller: i would further like to thank john who just spoke for kicking off my explanation and my reasonning. if the u.n. inspectors who are there looking for chemical

weapons, if they find evidence that it was actually the rebels and the free syrian armie that used the weapons, would obama be willing to take action against hem? and assist assad from removing them from rebel hands? caller: good morning, i'd like to say that china is sitting back, laughing at us going down the tubes because it's going to cost us a lot more money. they went right into afghanistan and they're just waiting for us to pull our troops out so they can get in and get the rare earth that is there so they can make the batteries for the prius and everything else. they're just sitting back laughing, waiting for their opportunity. they own the panama control, they own everything else in the world and they own half of our country already. so we better just wise up and just watch what we're doing.

thank you. host: that was our last call for this segment. we'll take a short time-out and then we'll talk next with former r.n.c. chairman michael steele about divisions within the republican party. everything from syria to health care, and other issues. and then a little bit later in the program, former democrat senator on his new novel "gridlock," a thriller, a fiction book, but speaks to some of the issues getting play here in washington and around the world. we'll be right back.

>> c-span, we bring public

affairs of washington to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences and offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or splite provider. and now you can watch us in h.d. >> one of the things i looked at as i was exploring this, i looked at a lot of the county records in which these colleges are. and when you look at the colonial county records, very often you'll have the name of the president or the name of their professor, and then listed with their taxable property will be an enslaved person or two or three. >> students actually brought their slaves to school with them? >> yes. so if you think about this, what then happens, if you look at the name of the president and then three lines over part of his

taxable property is as enslaved person, what you'll often have, for instance, in the case of princeton or harvard, you'll actually have the presidents name ditto the college. well, who owns the person? in the sort of common knowledge of the town of the local area, the president and the college are kind of inseparateable anyway. >> craig steven wilder on the connection between elite universities and a past entertwined with slavery. part of a three day holiday weekend on c-span 2. and book tv's book club returns in september with "this town". read the book and engage on our facebook page and on twitter. >> there are several types of bullying that the left love to engage in, the favorite of course is racial bullying. the reason for that is the left

philosophy is based almost completely on the point that they stand up for victimized groups. everything they do is to stand p on behalf of some victimized minority. women, -- and that is sort of the philosophy that they trot out. >> the editor at large at bright bart.com is sunday's indepth guest and take your calls and comments for three hours live starting at noon eastern and looking ahead, civil rights leader congressman john lewis will be october's guest. radio talk and show host mark levin. book tv returns in september with this town, two parties and a funeral, plus plenty of valet parking in america's gilded capitol.

read the book and engage on our facebook page and twitter. "washington journal" continues. host: at the table now, michael steele, the former r.n.c. chairman from 200-2011, thank you for joining us. we've been talking about syria, do you see a division within the republican party on syria? guest: i don't think there's been a clear voice that's come out about what republicans say about this. certainly there is a union anymority about what we need to do next, which is definitely deal with the use of chemical weapons by the assad government. but i think a lot of republicans are waiting to see exactly where the president is going to go with the foreign policy. you have the secretary of state calling this a moral obscenity. so the tone and the rhetoric is there. the question is now what are the next steps? the president and his team have been very good, at least in this instance, of getting and keeping the congress informed, getting members of congress in on the conversation early enough, so

that should some type of action come in the next few days, there will be a sense of it for that action, and i think that has been sort of the quiet work between the white house and the republicans in that house in particular. i don't think within the party itself there are voices that have risen to the point yet of saying, no, we don't need to go here. we're war weary, no more, no more. or guns blazing, let's go in and do a body count later. >> what do you think should happen? >> it's tough for me. i've been thinking on this the last few days, and it is a very difficult situation in that we've allowed this to progress to this point. we don't know yet on the ground who we should be supporting, you know? among the rebels. and got to pick and choose very carefully there. i think the intelligence reports that are coming out of syria right now are, you know, somewhat confusing in terms of

exactly where you line up, who do you get behind to move the assad redweem out of power. so i think, you know, the nexus that's been created by the use of chemical weapons here on the civilian population allows the yadse to take a posture that was very akin to what president linton took in the 1990's with kosovo that will allow us to make it very clear this far and no further. host: our guest is the former lieutenant governor of maryland from 2003-2007, michael steele is former r.n.c. chairman. we'll put the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen. we're talking about news of the day, but also divisions that we're reading about within the republican party on a host of issues. so we look forward to your questions and comments. we'll get to them in a moment. nted to get to some of the town haul action. guest: yeah, still a little

busy. host: speaking of divisions, the -- used the word impeachment when he talked about the president. here's a look. >> i don't i have the legal background to know if that rises to high crimes and misdemeanors, but i think they're getting very close as terms -- let me share with you. i had u.s., c.i.s. employees who did the background investigation, told me personally, that homeland security told them don't worry about it, ignore all the background approved people. this is the management telling the career employees to do something against the law. so, i'm documenting all this stuff as it goes along but i don't know where that level is. i'm kind of like the lady in the back, i am fed up. i am frustrated. and, you know, i am happy to

raise an issue at every point. barack obama's a personal friend of mine, he became my friend in the senate. but that does not mean i agree in any way with what he's doing or how he's doing it. and i, quite frankly, think he's in a difficult position he's put himself in. and if it continues, i think we're going to have another constitutional crisis in our country in terms of the presidency. host: michael steele? guest: i don't see institutional crisis here, i see a difference of politics and opinion. and with all respect to the senator, i am a great admirer of him, that republicans out here now talking about impeaching the president, based on what? are you really going to introduce that bill in the house of the senate? if you are, just do it. can we get past this point, which has been a dogfight with

this president from day one. on virtually everything that he wants to do. and i get the politics of that. i even see some of the policy implications that come from that. but i think we're at a point now where it is not even credible to have a conversation about impeaching the president of the united states at this stage. so let's keep it real. and let's talk about, as we started this discussion on syria, and if the president needs our help as the minority leadership of the country, to move a foreign policy in a certain direction, then let's do that. if the president needs direction in getting jobs back in the forefront of what we should be about, then let's do that. if we have serious concerns about the implementation of obama care, then propose solutions to fix those problems. but, i think for me, at this stage, this conversation lends itself to sort of the point

where people kind of look at you, scratch their head and go really? that's the best you've got? when unemployment is this, when you know we're concerned about that. these issues laid before us, as kids go back to school this fall into some failing school systems around the country, as you know, detroit unhinges, there are bigger problems for us as a nation to come together around, and i don't see this being one of those. host: back to health care, the affordable care act, obama care, depending on what you want to call it. more divisions within the republican party. lot of folks saying defund obama care, others say no. what do you think? host: we've had 30 votes to upsend, defund, repeel obama care in the house. and that bill, if it got out of the house, which you know, past 40 times goes nowhere in the

senate and certainly will not be signed by the pot of the united states. so, again, if you're staking new ground and making different claims about how obama care, and i think it's an abomination, it's not economically viable or feasible and certainly i think in terms of the impact it has on decisions that individuals make with respect to their health care, it's creating a bureaucracy we don't want in that decision process. but having said that i still believe if there are avenues that we can begin to reform the reform, then let's do that. let's lay those out and they're members of the house and some in the senate who have talked about and begun to talk about carving out pieces of this bill and working on making sure those pieces work, whether it's from the implementation side or from the program side of the policy. well, let's do that. again, i just think that we're

spending -- we're spinning a lot of wheels here and not going anywhere advancing the conversation. you would think after 40 votes in the house that there would be some momentum there. there isn't. and i get the polls are also showing that frustration out there, even while people are saying we are suspicious of or do not outright want this policy to go into effect. then let's go to that point and begin to move the dialogue and the conversation in the direction. host: first call for michael steele, the former r.n.c. chairman, former lieutenant governor of maryland. jim, independent caller. hi. caller: it's an honor to talk to you michael. my question is, do you think the democrats are hypocrites if we go to war in syria? ened i think you did more for the republicans than this current chairman, whatever his name is. and i think you should run for president. d i wish you didn't work for

msnbc, chris matthews and them are a bunch of bullies, i think. guest: i appreciate that very much. and i think in respect to syria, you raise an interesting question. it does raise an issue of some level of hypocrisy in terms of the outrange that was heaped upon the george bush administration with respect to afghanistan and iraq. but there are some slight differences here. one to do with the documented facts of the u.s. of chemical weapons. number two, the general sense that this regime is unhenged and therefore needs to be contained in a way that you didn't necessarily see with the likes of some of the other players over the last few years, whether you're talking iran or whatever. so, i think that there's a different tone that you have

with syria that you didn't have with the others. again, i harken back to similarities to kosovo from humanitarian perspective but it does put the democrats in a very ticklish box right now, particularly given the warriness of the american host: jim is on the line from texas. republican line. is whatmy question about this tainted election -- the obama administration. guest: in what respect? irs.r: the guest: the irs is a huge issue. i do not know how that translated in terms of a repressed election.

that mightgroups have been delayed in their formation. were clearly conservative organizations that were injured in their ability to getting -- hindered in their ability to get a message out, i do not know if there was a correlation in the inability of voters to get to the polls. host: caller, are you still there? i think they are gone. the earlier caller mentioned france previous -- the rnc chair. first, i want to get your rightsn to the civil anniversary of the march on washington. from martin luther king

on to president obama speech tomorrow, the pillars, i think they are powerful statements that on how weak we are on issues of race, there is an undergird to our veins that pushes us to be better. having said that, i still believe there is a great deal of work to do, and honestly, that work begins in my own community, the black community. wasted in some sense parts of the legacy that has been handed to us. when you look at the systemic issues that impact their community, whether it is from an educational and criminal justice

or health care, have to take ownership and responsibility as well in defining the next stages of progress. we are a post-civil rights generation. there is no doubt about that. with those that walked worked andught -- fought with king, it is now our time to take ownership of legacy, history and writing the history in our own voice he comes increasingly important. host: let me add a piece of tape from reince priebus at yesterday's rnc event talking about the party's message on civil rights. [video clip] proud, rich has a

history of opportunity, but we cannot tell it anymore. we have lost the history of this party because we do not tolerate. it is time -- tell it. it is time we do. i also know past accomplishments do not address the issues of the day. building a better future is up to us. we have an opportunity that god gave us. none of us are here by accident. i am not standing before you by accident. you did not come here by accident. we'll a lot of work to do. i want to make you proud of this party. when we are talking about building a republican party like we have never done before, that is exactly what we are doing. i am not interested in a story here or there by hiring a couple of people down the hallway and calling it out reach. host: michael steele, a little bit more?

guest: i appreciate the sentiment. that is something reince priebus talked about when he was my general counsel. i find it odd that they deconstructed everything to build an ability to reach out, which is effectively what we were able to do while i was chairman by building a coalition that was centered around the country, not in washington, creating a network of over 130,000 individuals that were the personal carriers of who we are, we believe and why we believe it. having said that, you still have the challenge of perception versus reality. so, if you want to create the perception that we are the party of civil rights and the party that is for your progress, then the reality says that is not true where you are promoting voter registration laws that effectively take away my ability

to engage in the franchise, to be able to exercise that fundamental right, if that is my perception, you have to begin to address that as well. i think there is more effort that needs to be done, clearly. i do not think this is something that gets done in washington. i think it is done by state parties -- state party organizations and structures and individuals in those parties that are committed to this. it is one thing for the chairman to say we want to build a better brand, a better party, or when a state chairman refuses to put in place the infrastructure to do that, to build the ground game and bring together the forces on the ground to implement that, it does not mean much. host: patrick. new orleans. independent caller. steele.yes, mr. i would like your opinion on a vision i will share in the form

of a question -- free enterprise and capitalism are the core of our economic prosperity in america, unfortunate there are entire communities notinin funcl capitalism it is they lack the community and the structure in order to land the jobs necessary for upward mobility. what is the republican party doing to promote capitalistic to thes -- solutions social economic divide in this country? guest: that is an interesting question, patrick, i will to answer it is way, it is one thing for us to talk about a .ising tide lifting all boats i am an advocate and was a friend of jack kemp, who very much believed that functional capitalism, creating an enterprise system that raises every boat is vitally important to sustaining, growing, and

expanding the opportunities, particularly for minorities in this country. i am an advocate of that. i am prepared, and i think the party needs to be prepared to take it to the next level, and that is actually a new starting point. it is one thing to say a rising tide lifts all boats, you have to have a vote first and if you do not have a boat, when the tide comes in, you drown. that is what we have seen time after time, economic recovery after economic recovery. i think the party has a unique opportunity to talk about how it would create the --ortunity to get the boat to have something that you own, creating ownership society that is built around some core, free principles of how you will invest, how you save, how you spend, how you earn, and how you

grow your own personal economy, which feeds into a broader economy. you talk about revitalizing a neighborhood. it starts with creating an investment in the neighborhood to the individuals already there. you cannot gentrify a community, import opportunities for everyone else and leave out the folks that have been there for 20, 30 years. that is the tide rolling in and folks drowning as they are pushed out of their homes and businesses because you want a cleaner the better looking operation or community. that is not how it works. it has to be a consistent investment that starts with education, job training, and those tools that are vitally important -- the partnership between the private sector and the public sector, incentives to tax policy, revenue policy that allows the private sector to take that risk it needs to take to create ownership society.

host: youngstown, ohio. cliff. the public and caller. -- republican caller. caller: i will try to be read. conservative, speak to progressives and say by lowering taxes and regulations it will create an economy that is better for everyone, they say you are just for the rich at the expense of the poor. if i say entitlements need to be reined in or they will not either for anyone, they say you want people to die. the thing is we are in a street fight. mitt romney was a fine candidate, but when it came to taking the gloves off, he would not do that. we are rational people. conservatives and republicans are rational people that give rational arguments, facts-based arguments, and they say we are racist, kooks and nuts.

we can make all the nice speeches that we want, but in on end they have the media their side. and it is not that we are not presenting our position. we are, in a rational manner, but that does not make up for people to hate you, and the media is not on our side, they are on their side. from my point of view, the only way we are going to break through is by getting down in the mud with them and starting to use what they use. host: any response? littlei lost the last bit, but i think you make an important point. you are talking about resenting a rational argument in the face of irrational responses, and that is a very difficult today -- thing to do. this is where you back it up. look at what republican

governors around the country are doing. kasich how governor john or scott walker, or susana martinez, and others were vilified when they first came into office when they started to, on the heels of this recession, put in place the principles that they argued about and argued for as candidates and as public servants in the past. there reality is that people began to see the proof was in the pudding. they began to experience, directly, the rational impact of the policy. so, the irrationality falls away. everybody thought scott walker would get kicked out on his keister for adopting and pushing the policies he was pushing until people saw they were working and beginning to have a positive impact on the economy there, just that the time just -- just as they were going to

the polls to recall him. for republicans, the proof is in the pudding. you good with the leadership we have in place -- look at what the leadership we have them places doing. talk about our solutions for a city like detroit. democratad 60 years of control in that city, so the proof is in the pudding. you can backup 60 years of irrational policy with a rational approach is that allow at least begin to have a different conversation. that is the direction that i think you want to go in. -it rational --ut out-irrational. no doubton crazy, about it, but the way you pushback is by demonstrating through examples of where republican leadership right now

is making a real difference. host: back to economic matters and the rnc event held this weekend, one of the speakers says african-americans have immigrantskseat to and gays. i want to show you that tape and get your response. [video clip] >> everybody comes in front of them on the bus -- gays, immigrants, women, environmentalists -- we never hear any talk about the conditions fighting -- confronting poor blacks and poor people in general, and if dr. king were alive today, he would not just be talking about butice for trayvon martin, he would also give a prayer for the 18-year-old man, the little baby that was shot in the face by two black kids.

host: mr. steele? important raises an point. it goes back to how we began the conversation. a lot of this next effort in civil rights, economic rights, political rights, will have to begin within the black community itself. you have had the marches, theches, the legislation, voting rights act, the civil rights act itself -- now, it becomes a question in a matter of implementation. if, you know, if we tolerate within the black community 500- class african-american youths being slaughtered on the streets of chicago as they were in 2012, why shouldn't the rest of america? if we tolerate the miseducation of our kids in our public school systems, why shouldn't everybody else?

why should we expect something different in terms of response from the broader public that we do not expect from ourselves? i think a lot of what bob and others are beginning to talk about makes sense. when bill cosby raised these concerns and these questions 10 years ago, he was vilified about this -- you should not talk about our dirty laundry. aboutah, we have to talk it because it is piling up, number one, and we have to do something to clean it up. looking at the out of wedlock birthrate in the black community, the abortion rate in the black community, the incarceration rate -- these are systemic issues that need to be addressed holistically, but that can only begin within the community itself. i cannot expect you, paul, to solve my problems. you can look at my problems, speak to my problems, but to expect you to actually begin to

solve it is irrational and unrealistic, and i think it has to begin with the steps that i take. you can help me in that effort if that is what it comes to at a certain point, and i think that has to be a part of this conversation more than anything else. behink dr. king would appalled by what he sees today, would be concerned about the trayvon martin case, but equally concerned by a lot of other cases that go untold and undiscussed in the community as well. host: democratic caller. jupiter, florida. larry. caller: thank you, sir. think god for c-span. let me say for decades, liberalism is a dirty word. the world has turned. it will be conservatism. all i can think of is hypocrisy and obstructionism.

i used to be a staunch republican conservative. thank god before i die i have seen the light. the sooner this republican party today goes out of existence, the sooner this country will return back to its greatness. thank you, sir. larry.thank you, i appreciate a little bit of what larry is saying is the republican party today is certainly not the party that i joined when i was 17 years old, growing up here in the president -- the nation's capital, as i 1973 election who as i did during the election listening to the man like my mother, ronald reagan. anald reagan could not win republican primary today because

a lot of dynamics that have occurred within the party. misunderstanding and a misconstruction of what conservatism is -- and i take to heart what larry says about .onservatism being a dirty word it is not a dirty word. it is not an irrational mindset. it is not for the loony bin. it is a philosophy that peaks to individual liberty -- speaks to individual liberty and responsibilities and recognizes the power of individuals over institutions. and we can have that debate in terms of how it plays out in terms of policy, but for me, at least, looking at the party a mindsethave created within the party that i think is going to be hard to overcome short-term. we will see it played out in the upcoming presidential time

areas. you will see it played out -- primaries. you will see it played out in congressional primaries, as you have already begun to see it play out since 2008. i think there will be a lot more gnashing of teeth and turning of that particular worm for that party, but it will be voices like myself, jc watts and others out there that will help this into rise from these ashes a new order, a new day, that is consistent with some old, time- honored truths that the party has always held. host: let's hear from paul. virginia. [indiscernible] -- leftcrat party (he me.

one problem is they have no backbone, no spine, no caps on this. ahonis. domesticthese terrorists who say things about republicans, and republicans say something -- do not say anything in their defense. as far as republicans being obstructionist, half of the country does not want obama's policies enforced, and the so- called obstructionists are representing us. thank you. a point think that is that should not be lost on the political dynamics right now, paul, and i think the caller makes a very precise point in that when you go back and look at how we cobbled together the coalition's to win in 2009, to

get chris christie elected in a date like new jersey, a very blue state, not necessarily republican-friendly, it was about recognizing the opportunity to have a different conversation with a broad base of voters. why is chris christie successful -- he appropriately represents the people of the state. he is not catering to a particular point of view held by a broader national party. he is uniquely new jersey. that is what people like. when you look at the tea party candidates that we elected across the country in 2010, the same story. these men and women came to the nation's capital for the purpose of doing the nation's business, yes, but, more importantly, to making sure there was business to do in the future -- in other words, that this capital, this government would stand a level of -- would stand.

the level of spending became too much for folks out there who sent to washington representatives they wanted to represent them. this crowd in this town was not used to seeing that, someone come into the system that could not get turned, who would not become washington. of thisat ted cruz's town do not do that. they are representing the people that sent them here, and it is a very different kind of field. the question becomes, at some point, you have to get something done, so striking the balance between honoring all of the promises made back home, and actually affecting the nations business through governing becomes a real trick. it can be done. governors do it every day. they have lopsided legislatures from the opposing party, and they find a way. chris christie is a good example. the gentle is another -- bobby

jindal is another. getting things done. we cannot lose sight of the fact that these folks are here for the first time doing what the people back home sent them to do. we have never seen them do that before. normally, you become washington, go to the fancy deceptions and dinners and you are living your life, and now you are being held accountable for your leadership, a different pair of shoes for them to put on. host: how would you describe what the party is on immigration and where does he need to go ahead? is lost think the party in space on immigration, very much as it is on issues like the voting rights act. those other 22 sorts of damocles that hang over the party. on assimilation, we have always been supporters of the idea of folks that want to come here to this country, yet we have

allowed a conversation about the rule of law to blind us to the reality of her several stories, personal dreams. so, we have fallen out of balance their. and, look, i am all for let's secure the borders first and make sure we do not have a repeat of the last 20 years, which was a failure of the 1986 legislation that did not secure the borders appropriately, so, 20 years later, here we are. having said that, there is the human drama, the human story of a family or individual that is seeking a better life, and that is something that we have always, as a party, been able to speak to, and i would like to hear us speak to that again. it is the undercurrent. immigrants will tell you that story first. it is not about breaking u.s. law, crossing the border.

it is about that story. whether it is running from political oppression at home, or finding a better dream for themselves -- that is the story that we should wrap all of our policies and conversations around to help people understand exactly what a new immigration system would look like. host: moving on to scarsdale, new york. republican. what is your name? caller: [indiscernible] mr. steele, thank you for taking my call. i have a big issue on where the republican party is going. i find that it has come to the platform being more about abortion and issues like that. we have to go back to what this country was founded on. it was founded on protestant ethics. if you went back to protestant ethics, we do not lose sight of

where we have to go ahead. we keep on talking about the constitution and amendments. we have a constitution with god. the 10 commandments is a constitution. if we abide with that, we will not be fighting wars with each other. it has become such a fragmented party. hear thehame when i republicans who call themselves reagan republicans, the key party -- they have lost -- the tea party. they have lost track. evolvingo not keep on as we go. thank you. guest: thank you. there is a lot in what you say to chew on there in terms of what the party looks like in the future, how it begins to chart its direction. i think the social issues are a very valuable part of the conversation. what my concern has become is

flippingnt years, not into becoming a religious party, not flipping into becoming a party of judging people morally, because that is not what we are. we are a political party. we have priests, rabbis, imams, ministers that set the moral tone and help us stay true to that particular compass. it does not mean we cannot integrate that into our public policy, which is part of our heritage, for sure, the protestant ethics, the judeo- christian tradition, etc., but we have to be very careful in terms of how we allow our politics to be set up to be judges of people's lives, and help people live their lives and the decisions that they make. that are true to our core -- court, the libertarian core that exists within us that is

part of our founding, then those types of steps are antithetical to what we believe. i had a young man tell me when i was running for the u.s. senate in 2006 -- i was up in baltimore . he was a young entrepreneur in -- early-30's, and he said i would be a republican because i am down with your message on creating wealth for the generation. he said i go to church on sunday, and my pastor lays out the rules i have to live by. i do not need a political party doing that for me monday through saturday. i have always been reminded of that, certainly as chairman, and in my public service, to recognize that there is a limit that you do reach, and as a

party, i think there are times where we step over that limit, and we get into judging and making decisions for people, about people. it was an effort to create a litmus test of who would be a real republican, a true republican, and i am like, you're not going to do that, because you do not get to judge my values. you do not get to tell me what kind of republican i am. term rino's,e the they are the true rhinos, republicans in name only. host: michael steele, thank you for your time. former rnc chairman and former governor of maryland. there are some stories that say you're going to run for governor. what do you have to say? guest: we are looking at it. we got back from a family

vacation, so next week, after labor day, we will lay out what we are going to do. host: michael steele, thank you. guest: thank you. host: news from c-span radio. >> more on syria. writers tweeted out that downing street said the international community must respond to the alleged chemical attack in syria. this from "the financial times," british prime minister david cameron is recalling parliament as u.s.ia this thursday inspectors have delayed today's inspection. u.s. defense secretary chuck hagel says u.s. forces are ready to act on any order from president obama to strike syria. in an interview earlier today with bbc television, secretary chuck hagel also predicted that the u.s. intelligence agencies would soon conclude that last week's deadly attack on civilians in damascus was a chemical attack by the

government and he called it "the key good intelligence." meanwhile, syria's foreign minister says they have to below choices -- surrender or fight they choose toys fight back and will defend themselves in all means available here at he did not say what those means are. syria also says secretary of state john kerry is lying about chemical weapons used against robbins -- rebels. it is causing concern at the world health organization, where a stroke smith says it is it isg -- spokesman says issuing new guidelines for treating victims of chemical weapons agents. real politics tweets that saudi arabia is offering russian oilident vladimir putin and deal if you will switch sides on the syria issue. newsthe pentagon, the nbc

correspondent says officially president obama has not yet given the order to launch syrian attacks, but officials at the pentagon are operating as if this is, in fact, a done deal, and they expect the attack as soon as this week or early next week. there are four missiles within easy range of the targets they would want to hit, and each has a gps locator that can take the missile to a building, and take the window which to hit. news on c- latest span radio. >> "washington journal" will resume at 9:15 a.m. with steven eagle. also coming up at 10:00 a.m., outgoing homeland security

secretary janet napolitano. earlier this summer, she announced she would be stepping down from her cabinet position to become president of the university of california's system which includes ucla and the university of california oakley. again, her remarks live at 10:00 a.m. eastern. yesterday at the white house, president obama awarded the caa--- medal of honor to ty rter who is honored for saving -- soldier.upporter the simoni was hosted inside of the white house east room. -- ceremony was hosted inside of the east room. >> almighty god, we praise your favor upon a military force dedicated to defending liberty and justice for all. in every generation a continuous line of shed blood and shared

sacrifice have borne witness to our nation's first pencils of virtue come up honor and patriotism. of honor and patriotism. today, we are putting honor upon american -- an american soldier. tywe honor staff sergeant carter, a mind is that this simple, elegant award, animated by this, reveals the depth of the patriot's love and devotion. we pause to honor an american soldier, give thanks to the memory of the men that fought with him that day, even as we grieve their loss, giving thanks to the strength of his family. us, increaseong our faith and renew our hope that our lives will be marked by virtue, honor and patriotism.

we are asking and praying in your holy name, amen. >> good afternoon, everybody. please be seated. welcome to the white house. actually, i should say welcome back. many of you joined us earlier this year when we presented the medal of honor to clinton for his actions in the very same today.that we remember he cannot be here, as he is engaged in a cause that is close to all of our hearts, ending homelessness among veterans, the we are honored to welcome back some of the men that fought that , members of the black knight troop, and the goldstar families of those who gave their lives that day. as these soldiers and families will tell you, they are a

family, forged in battle and loss and love. reunion,something of a and we come together again with gratitude and pride to bestow the medal of honor on a second member of this family, staff sergeant ty carter. as always, we are joined by many distinguished guest, and we welcome you all. today, i want to focus on our most established guest. more than 40 members of ty family -- your parents, mark, barbara, your wife, shannon, who you call the ceo of your family. you are a wise man. i have the same arrangement. [applause] [laughter] children.iful eight-year-old madison, in her new dress, and she was telling me about her new room, and nine-

month-old sierra, for whom we'll try to make this brief, because we do not know how long the cheerios will last. came, ty carter said he was hoping to take his children around washington to show them the sites and the history, but if you want to know what makes our country truly great, what a true american hero looks like, you do not have to look too far. you just have to look at your dad because he is the site that we have come to see. your dad inspires us like those big monuments and memorials do, for this is an historic day. for the first time in nearly half a century, since the vietnam war, it is the first family of and able to present the medal of honor to two survivors from the same better. triple --ayed -- paid , we talkede to clint

about how he allowed three escape from being pinned under a humvee. it is a story of what our soldiers do for each other. scott keating was not just one of the most remote outposts in afghanistan. it was a also one of the most vulnerable, low ground, surrounded by towering mountains. --ke ty carter one time broke, their worst fears became reality. 53 american soldiers were suddenly surrounded by more than 300 taliban fighters. the outpost is being slammed from every direction, machine

gun fire, rocket propelled grenades, mortars, sniper fire. it was chaos -- the blizzards of tylets and steel, into which carter ran, not once, not twice, not even a few times, but perhaps 10 times, displaying the onence of true heroism, not the urge to surpass others, but to serve others at whatever cost. he jumped out of bed, put on his helmet, grab some ammunition and ran to resupply his comrades. when they needed more, he ran back, blasted the locks and sprinted yet again, dodging explosions, darting between craters back to the humvee. himferocious fire forced inside, so it was that five

american soldiers, including ty carter, found themselves trapped inside of that on the. being peppered with shrapnel. worst of all, taliban fighters were in the cap. the choice it seems, was simple, stay and die, or make a run for it. steppedmore, ty carter out into the barrage, and along with brad larsen, he lay down fire, providing cover for the other three as they dashed for safety, but in those hellish moments one man went down, and then another and stuff on disappeared -- stephen disappeared. forarter and brad held out hours, holding the line, preventing the outpost from being completely overrun. ty carter would later say we were not going to surrender,

we're going to fight until the last round. buddy,ey saw him, their stephen, on the ground, wounded about 30 yards away. when the moment was right, ty carter stepped out again, ran to him, applying a tourniquet to one of his legs, bandaging the attending to his wounds, grabbing a tree branch to split his ankle, and if you are left with just one image from that day, let it be this -- ty carter bending over, picking him up, cradling him in his arms, and carrying him through all of those bullets and getting him back to that humvee. then ty carter stepped out again, recovering a radio, finally making contact with the rest of the troops, and they came up with a plan. as clint romesha and his team

provided cover, the three made their escape, delivering stephen to the medics. the battle was still not over, ty carter returned to the fight. he stepped out one last time, exposing himself to enemy fire, grabbed a chainsaw, cut down a aiding tree, saved the station and help to rally his troops as they fought yard by yard. they pushed the enemy back, and our soldiers retook their camp. now, ty says this award is not mine alone. it was one team in one fight, and everybody did what we could do to keep each other alive. some of these men are with us again, and i have to repeat this because they are among the most highly decorated units of this entire war. 37 army commendation medals.

27 purple hearts. 18 bronze stars for their valor. that -- silver stars for their gallantry. soldiers, please stand. [applause] [applause] today, we also remember once more the eight extraordinary soldiers who gave their last full measure of devotion, some of whom spent their final moments trying to rescue ty and the others in that humvee, and we stand with their families

remind us how far the heartbreak ripples -- five wives, widows and honor their husbands, seven boys and girls who honor their dead. -- their dad. mom --, fathers, steps stepmom's and stepdad. long after the war is over, these families will still need our love and support for all of the years to come, and i would asked the families to stand and be recognized, please. [applause]

[applause] finally, as we honor his courage on the battlefield, i want to recognize his courage in the other battle he has fought. openly withs opened honesty and elegance about his struggle with poster manic stress. the flashbacks, nightmares, anxiety, the heart ache that makes it sometimes almost impossible to get through a day. he has urged us to remember another soldier who suffered and eventually lost his home life back home, and who we remembered today for his service in afghanistan that day, private and faulkner junior.

d faulkner junior. at first, ty resisted seeking help, but with the encouragement of commanders and the love of his wife and his kids, ty got help. the pain of that day, we can only imagine, may never fully go away, but he stands before us as a loving husband, an exemplary soldier, who even redeployed to afghanistan. so, now, he wants to help other recovery,their own and it is absolutely critical for us to work with brave young men like ty and put an end to any stigma who -- that keeps folks from seeking help. to any of our troops or veterans watching and struggling, look at this man, this soldier, this warrior, and he is as tough as if he can find the

courage and the strength not nly seek help, but to speak out about it and take care himself and and stay strong, so can you. as you summon that strength, our nation needs to keep summoning the commitment and the resources to make sure we are there when you reach out. no one should ever suffer alone. no one should ever die waiting for the mental health care they need. that is unacceptable. all of us have to do better than we are doing. part of healing is facing the sources of pain, as we per pair, i will ask you, ty, to never forget the difference you made on that day. soldiers are alive today, like brad who said, "i know -- i owe because you have had

the urge to serve others at whatever cost,so many army families can welcome home their own sons here it because of you, stephanie's mother, who joins us again, is able to say, he brought us to safety, which gave him more stephen felts earth. and paste, -- felt at peace, and she added, i am grateful to ty more than words can describe. that is something. god bless you. god bless all our men and women in uniform. --d bless the united dates of the united states of america. with that, i would like to have the citation read. >> the president of the united states of america, authorized by

an act of congress march 3, 1860 -- 1863, has awarded in the name of congress the medal of honor, the united states army, conspicuous gallantry, at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. specialist ty carter exiting -- distinguished himself, at the risk of his life, above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a scout, third squadron, fourth per grade combat team, fourth industry -- imagery, armed enemy in afghanistan, october 3, 2009. on that morning, specialist carter and his comrades awakened to an attack of over 300 enemy fighters occupying the high ground, employing concentrated fire from rifles, rocket propelled grenades, machine

guns, motors, and small guns. he ran twice through a 100 meter long list of enemy fire to -- and voluntarily remained there to defend the isolated position. armed with only a rifle, he placed accurate deadly fire on the enemy, preventing the position from being overrun over the course of several hours, with complete disregard for his own safety and despite his own wounds, he ran through machine- gun fire to rescue a critically wounded comrade. specialist carter rendered life extending first a and carried the soldier to cover. he again maneuvered through enemy fire to check on a fallen soldier and recovered the squads radio, which allowed them to coordinate their evacuation with

fellow serb -- soldiers. with teammates, he assisted in removing the wounded soldier 100 meters through withering enemy fire before returning to the fight. specialist carter's heroic actions were critical to the defense of combat outpost, saving the lives of his fellow soldiers. specialist cai carters -- ty carter's are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, third squadron, fourth brigade combat team, and the united states army.

[applause] [applause]

>> let us pray. the god who rules the world, speak to our hearts when our courage fails and our site grows dim and our bodies may grow real weary. keep us resolute and steadfast to things that cannot be shaken, bonding and hope in knowing our labor is not in vain. deep in our faith in each earn a purpose, renewing us that love which never fails, lift up our eyes and behold beyond the things which are seen in temporal, the things which are on scene in -- unseen in eternal. all this we pray in your blessed and holy name, amen. >> thank you very much, everybody. i hope you all enjoyed the reception. i want to not only thank ty and his extraordinary family, thank

thank his unit, and thank all of you for being able to write knowledge the extraordinary sacrifices our men and in uniform make every single day. ty is a representative of exactly the kind of people and quality of people who are serving us. we are grateful to them. god bless you all. god bless america. thank you. [applause] ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> that ceremony from yesterday. coming up, we will go back to "washington journal," bringing to a discussion about eminent domain. our guest will be steven eagle,

professor at the george mason university school of law. we will also have live remarks from outgoing homeland security secretary janet napolitano at the national press club. her remarks will be live at 10:00 a.m. eastern. look atp next, we will remarks yesterday from secretary of state john kerry, responding to reports and intelligence that the assad government in syria has used chemical weapons on syria. following those brief remarks, we will get your thoughts on the action the government should take in syria. the numbers will be on the screen. now, for those remarks from secretary of state john kerry.

>> for the last several days, president obama and his entire national security team have been reviewing the situation in syria, and i want to provide an update on our efforts as we consider our response to the use of chemical weapons. what we saw in syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. it defies any code of morality. let me be clear. the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. by any standard, it is inexcusable, and despite the excuses and equivocation that some have manufactured, it is

undeniable. the meaning of this attack goes beyond the conflict of syria, and that conflict has brought already so much terrible suffering. this is about the large-scale indiscriminate use of weapons that the civilized world long ago decided must never be used at all, a conviction shared even by countries that agree on little else. there is a clear reason that the world has banned entirely the use of chemical weapons. there is a reason the international community has set a clear standard and why many countries have taken major steps to eradicate these weapons. there is a reason why president obama has made it such a priority to stop the proliferation of these weapons and locked them down where they do exist. there is a reason why president obama has made clear to the assad regime that this

international norm cannot be violated without consequences. and there is a reason why no matter what you believe about syria, all peoples in all nations who believe in the cause of our common humanity must stand up to assure there is accountability for chemical weapons. last night after speaking with foreign ministers about the gravity of this situation, i watched the videos, videos that anybody can watch in the social media, and i watched them one more gutwrenching time. it is hard to express in words the human suffering that they lay out before us. as a father, i cannot get the image out of my head of a man who held up his dead child, wailing while chaos swirled around him, the images of entire families

dead in their beds without a drop of life or even a visible wound, bodies contorting in spasms, human suffering that we can never ignore or forget. anyone who can claim an attack of this staggering scale can be contrived or fabricated needs te contrived or fabricated needs to check their conscience and their own moral compass. --t is before us needs israel. it is compelling. want to underscore that while investigators are gathering additional evidence on the ground, our understanding of what is how -- what has happened in syria is grounded in facts common sense. the reported number of victims, the reported symptoms of those thewere killed or injured, first-hand accounts from humanitarian organizations on the ground like doctors without borders and the syria human

rights commission. these all indicate that everything these images are already screaming at us israel. -- is real. that chemical weapons were used in serial. regime that the syrian maintains custody of these weapons. we know that the syrian regime has the capacity to do this with rockets. we know that the regime has been determined to clear the opposition in the very places where the attacks took place. with our own eyes, we have become witnesses. we have additional information about this attack. that information is being compiled and reviewed together with our partners, we will provide that information in the days ahead. our sense of basic humanity is not only by this cowardly crime, but by the

cynical attempt to cover it up. regime has failed to cooperate with the u.n. investigation, using it to stall the effort to bring to light what happened in damascus in the dead of night. the u.n.-moon said, investigation will not determine who used these weapons, only whether such weapons were used. a judgment that is already clear to the world. --poke on thursday withd minister al-oreign moallem. if they hadear that nothing to hide, their response should be immediate transparency and immediate action. their response needed to be unrestricted and immediate access. failure to permit that would

tell its own story. theead, for five days, syrian regime refused to allow the investigators access to the site of the attack that was allegedly -- that would exonerate them. it attacked the area further, shelling it and systematically destroying evidence. that is not the behavior of a government that has nothing to hide. that is not the action of a regime eager to prove to the world that it did not use chemical weapons. the regime's belated decision to allow axis is too late. access is too late to be credible. today's reports of the attack on the human investigators and they investigatorsun and continued shelling. i have spent hours on the phone with foreign ministers and other

leaders. these ministrations is consulting with members of congress, we will continue to these conversations. president obama has been in close touch with leaders of our key allies and the president will be making an informed decision about how to respond to this discriminate use of chemical weapons. obamao mistake, president believes that there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most horrible. nothing is more serious as nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny. thank you. >> secretary of state john kerry yesterday talking about the situation in syria and the use of chemical weapons. we are opening our phone lines

to get your thoughts on his use of the term moral obscenity. the use ofing chemical weapons a moral obscenity. what action should the u.s. take in syria? our phone lines are open. for republicans. democrats, (202) 585-3880. for independents, (202) 585-3882 . stan is our first caller. my comment is this. the democrats in the past always wondered where are the weapons of mass destruction. we found them. we needr thing is -- to stay out of their completely. it is a no win situation for us. either side that wins, radical

muslims that do not respect our values, our christian values. that is it. >> charles and ben, missouri. democrat fund. we need to do nothing. what started 9/11, we keep going to these foreign countries. we have no business there, leave them alone, take care of our own business. >> lisa, new york, independent. caller: we should stay out of syria. terrible that they are using chemical weapons against their own people, but i do not want our troops attacked by chemical weapons. they should handle their own problems, or nato should get involved.

o'er the worldwide organizations, the u.s. troops should stay out of syria. the washington post has an article saying that after syria, obamaal allegations, considering limited strike. obama is weighing a strike against syria of limited scope and duration designed to serve as punishment for syria's use of chemical weapons and as a deterrent. according to senior administration officials, the timing of an attack, which would last no more than two days and involve sea launch cruise missiles. be dependent on three factors, completion of an intelligence report assessing bility,government culpa ongoing consultation with allies

and congress, and determination of justification under international law. militia - melissa. with everybody else. we should take care of our own, stay out of syria. we lost too many troops in afghanistan and iraq. alone, i say leave it hate what the people are going through. we have people in the u.s. that are starting. -- that are starving. host: bernie, new jersey, democrats. the northern border of israel and syria, there is a neutral zone. i believe that in cooperation with the israelis and the u.n., a humanitarian rescue should be launched from that side of the border. israel is hampered in their ability to assist the citizens of syria because of concerns

that terrorists would come in under the guise of needing help. they have not been able to help as much they would normally. what it'st n called for, but certainly humanitarian rescue with the help of the friendly side of israel. they do not like to watch this kind of attitude, they are hampered in their ability to assist. we are continuing to take your calls on how the u.s. should react in syria. 5, we are alive with a discussion on eminent domain. stephen eagle will be our guest. james, alabama, republican line. caller: we have got to stay out

of this war. ideally that this is going to draw us into a third world war -- i believe this is going to draw us into a third world war. our enemy's.e one side is al qaeda, one side is a sought -- is assad. leave them alone, let them kill each other off. stay out of this. the russians, chinese, all those and are looking for a reason to attack america. i know it. they do not like obama. we need to stay out of this war. . period. host: florida, independent. caller: i would like to make a comment on syria. arst of all, i was in syria year and a half ago. i took all kinds of movies all over damascus.

i want to let the public know, if you can compare the old city in israel to damascus, it is the same. the people over there were dim -- were fantastic. i want to remind americans that back in 1995 when the muslim brotherhood tried to come into syria and take over aleppo, assad's father shut down the city. the muslim brotherhood has never come back into syria until now. feel, when ihat i was over there, there was no crime. a lot of canadians living over there. a very peaceful area. muslim brotherhood has been lurking in the background for years. this is their perfect opportunity to come in and take over. if we go over there and support these people with arms, we are out of our minds.

weapons of mass destruction, colin powell gave a visitation -- gave a dissertation that was wrong. shame on the state department, they are not getting information correctly. we are being led down a path by ssident people. they should get the facts before they take accide -- they take action. the associated press reporting that david cameron is recalling parliament for a discussion and vote on a military response to the chemical attack in syria. he said that the session will be held thursday when parliament would traditionally be on summer recess. a motion will be considered by lawmakers, who have been urging cameron to consult our limit before action. denise, ohio, democrats. think that america has

become a nation of glenn's -- a nation of gluttons as far as oil. we have to have our finger stuck in everybody in the middle east. we should leave it alone. these people have been warring and killing each other off since biblical times. nothing is going to change. thet has not changed since beginning of time, it will not change now. stay out of it. we have already got people in iraq and afghanistan. we are killing our nation's cream of the crop. what are we going to do when we need them on our homeland? stay out. host: does the use of chemical weapons change your thoughts? fax no -- caller: no. let them kill each other off. they have been doing it since

the vocal times. host: barbara, west virginia, republican. is -- it is aught terrible, horrible thing. for us to sit there as a nation and say, they are killing each other with chemical weapons -- we goofed the last time. to save israel this time -- to real, i think the images are real. i believe john kerry. back to world war ii when we ignored concentration camps in germany and poland, all those countries that millions of people were being slaughtered. that comes to the united states. say, they have been

fighting all these years, we need to do something. i trust the government to do something to correct this. i do not want to see a war or see our young men killed. i want these people to understand that they cannot do this. this has to be stopped. line,to our independent mark. i totally disagree. the use of chemical weapons is egregious. has tor we do in syria be done unilaterally. thing, russia and china dismissing all

is anotherd images, egregious thing. off the beatenly path when it comes to human rights. this is -- i totally disagree with what denise said. we need to be doing something. it needs to begin a laterally -- be unilaterally a concerted effort with other countries. host: our final call, indiana. james, democrat fun. caller: two things. one, what difference does it make if you shoot somebody with a 50 caliber machine gun or poor pour gas on them?

when are we going to learn to stay out of middle eastern civil wars? we have gained nothing. time to get out of there. the next time they hit us, use our crowdpleasers. you for all of your calls this morning. coming up next, a discussion on eminent domain and how that is used by state and local government. steven eagle from george mason university will be our guest. a news update from c-span radio. syria.pdate on david cameron recalling parliament for an urgent discussion on a possible military response to the chemical attack in syria. cameron says that the crisis session will be held thursday. the u.s. is expected to formally state whether syria used chemical weapons. an announcement of how president obama will respond to follow. according tothis

the associated press. the u.n. says that a team of experts has delayed a second trip to investigate the poison gas attack near damascus by one day. in a statement, the decision was made today in order to improve preparedness and safety for the team after unidentified snipers opened fire on the convoy yesterday. syrian foreign minister al- moallem said that the trip was postponed because of disputes between rival groups -- rebel groups. western powers are telling syrian opposition to expect a strike against assad's forces within days. this is according to sources who attended a meeting in istanbul. one of the sorters -- one of the sources tells reuters that the opposition was told that action to deter further chemical weapon

use could come in the next few days, they should prepare for peace talks in geneva. the meeting was between senior figures of the syrian national coalition, including its president and envoys from 11 alliance numbers that included u.s. envoy robert ford. the russian foreign ministry is of trying tou.s. create artificial, groundless accusations of military excuses -- uses for military intervention. the ministry says that washington is attempting to bypass the un security council to take action on the reported chemical attack. russia is an ally of syria's president and has a permanent seat on the council. they can block measures against the government proposed by the u.n. those are some of the latest headlines on syria. " continues.journal

host: joining us is steven eagle, professor of law at george mason university. we will spend the final 40 minutes talking about eminent domain, it has come back into the broader discussion because of a number of issues. couplereme court case a years ago, municipal concerns like the city of detroit. define what exactly is eminent domain. guest: it is a pleasure to be back on "washington journal." the power ofn is government to take private property. it is a very old howard, kings in europe exercised it hundreds of years ago. that peoplerose have to be compensated when their property was taken. it was an attribute of the british crown. afterthe resolution -- the revolution, states have the

power. the fifth amendment says that nor shall private property be taken without just compensation. it does not give the government power, it is assumed that as a sovereign, the everett has the power. -- the government has the power. was the fifth amendment based on experiences of the colonies with the crown? guest: the crown had accused the colonies -- had abused the colonies in many ways. the third of been prohibited troops. of tr -- the king of england did not abuse eminent domain. this fifth amendment was put in just because james madison thought it was important. issue of eminent domain, the term has come back into our discussion with the decision by the supreme court.

tell us a little bit about that case. efforts bynvolved the city and state of connecticut to revitalize an area which was economically depressed as a result of industries and naval bases in eastern connecticut closing. the kelo lived between thames river and long island sound. it was a very nice home in a moderate to middle income area. the state of connecticut and the city decided that they would ,ake all of those sound houses demolish them, and use them to a hotel, and and restaurants to complement the pfizer pharmaceutical company, which had built a facility next- door. kelo case,before the

everyone understood that government could take private property for public use. that meant one of three things. the first, for direct use by the fort ornt, for a government facility. the second, for use by the general public, a road. used by areason, heavily regulated public utility, like railroad or headline. were everyone had access and rates were set. with -- what the k case did -- what the kelo case did was to announce that public use also equated more broadly with public thefit, the idea being that revitalization of new london, connecticut conferred a public benefit and justified it being

treated as public use. host: economic benefit? guest: jobs in a general shock to the economy. up our phone open minds. the numbers for republicans, (202) 585-3881. .emocrats, (202) 585-3880 independents and others, (202) 585-3882. you can also reach us on facebook. 2005.lo decision was in since then, the economic downturn, financial collapse and the housing collapse. how does the collapse of the housing market play into discussion question mark -- play into discussion? guest: this is a controversial plan. it has been adopted and will be implemented in the city of richmond, california. around inn shopped san bernardino county and other places. the idea is that government

would condemn mortgages and would then basically readjust the amount of the mortgage to the homeowner so that the new mortgage would be based on the current market value of the home, rather than the much higher value in these cities at the time the original mortgage was given. is that a private company, mortgage resolution partners, had come up with the scheme whereby they would fund this, localfund governments would condemn mortgages and give the owners of those mortgages what was called just compensation. they would cancel the mortgages and issue new mortgages. at a muchmeowners lower amount.

to keep people from losing their homes and to keep the economy of these communities from faltering and keeping vacant real estate -- >> the banks are objecting to that? guest: the mortgage industry is this the first one fighting -- is vociferously fighting this. host: the city of richmond, california. california city let's -- looks to c's and d's home once -- look ease home loans. offering $150,000 to buy a bank loan on a house that is now worth $200,000 and is in danger of foreclosure. the would pay the bank, banks are saying that the house is look -- the house is worth more. guest: it is more than that. many of these loans, the

beority of these loans, will ones on which borrowers are current in their payments. borrowers are making their payments, as far as the lender is concerned, there is no loss. host: but the mortgages underwater? first in california and some other states, there is a one action role. if the lender goes against the property and forecloses on the loan, the lender cannot turn around and to see the borrower for deficiency. even if the borrower is not liable for a deficiency in court, there are people who are paying their loans, who have the money, who assume that the parcel may go up in value. they do not want them stating on their credit rating. these loans are performing. say that a $300,000 loan in good standing is only worth

$150,000 is problematic. host: some callers waiting to talk to you. republican line. caller: good morning. livecase in new london, i not far from there. correct me if i am wrong -- that case was -- and they took that land almost 10 years ago. they never did anything with the land. they never built any businesses or hotels or motels or anything. is that true? guest: you're absolutely right. what happened is, the city tried to -- the city buy out as many of those houses as they could. as soon as they bought a house, they demolished it to demoralize the residents. after they obtained the last houses, they were going to have a new area to complement the pfizer center.

the economy turned, you are right, nothing was done. that land is vacant. it looks forlorn. host: ocean city, new jersey, john. caller: i agree with steven eagle. isstitutionally, article 3 extremely so think. -- extremely succinct. the supreme court is interpreting all kinds of -- this is just one more example of an out-of-control supreme court who has taken activism to the extreme and is crushing the small americans. i -- i have a question. do you feel that this exceeds andgood behavior clause, that they might be prosecuted criminally? guest:

there has been a lot of latitude in interpreting the constitution by judges. by five justice majority led justice stevens was able to point to some isolated cases dating back to the 19th century where governments were allowed to furtherate land the interest of other private companies that they thought were in the public interest. think this is an undue extension of the law, it is certainly enough within boundaries so it is not an egregious violation of the judges duty to have ruled the way they did. case was pretty high profile but we don't see a lot of these cases come up. we don't hear a lot about property cases and the federal and state courts. is there a lot concerning

eminent domain? yes, there are lots of eminent domain cases in local courts and most of them do not ofolve the ability government to take the land, rather, they involve how much compensation the owner will receive. it most lawyers that deal with these cases spend most of their time arguing over the amount of compensation which is an important issue in the city of richmond matter that you mentioned. is doinghat the city is constitutional, and i personally believe that under the1 decision which sets a low bar, you still have the problem of theher these owners mortgages are, in fact, going to get just compensation. i think the matter is more complex and more difficult than the city of richmond and its supporters let on. host: here is kim in michigan,

independent line. caller: i have a comment about -- you spoke of the kelo case -- wasn't it in michigan back in an1970s, the pole town - old polish neighborhood in detroit where there were old wasn't the entire neighborhood seized under eminent domain for general motors to build i believe a cadillac plant in that neighborhood? are you familiar with that? i think it was in the late 1970s or possibly early 1980s. it was called pole town. guest: the caller is absolutely right. the city of detroit literally condemned an entire thriving ethnic neighborhood with 1600 businesses, many churches, and a large residential district to

build the gm -- cadillac assembly plant which was not ill was not built- until many years later. this is a more complex situation . basically, people say it was done for general motors. the fact is, the city of detroit was able to get large federal grants for urban revitalization and then in deuce general motors to build in that old neighborhood where as general anors preferred to build eight sight out of town. in essence, general motors did not and if it from the situation as much as the city of detroit getting the federal money to enable the scheme to work. host: how many years did it take for them to build that plant? guest: i think it was six or seven years after that the plant

was finally built. court,higan supreme shortly before the kelo case, repudiated its holding in the in another case that involved the metropolitan airport. the board in michigan adopted what was the same minority view and sawole town case the error in that decision shortly before kelo, a bit too late for those people. good morning to adam on our democrat line. caller: thanks for taking my call. the situation that i have here in my review -- the federal regulations, the government acquiring public property

through eminent domain and using public monies -- can you explain the reasoning for the bonds on eminent domain actions and why they are needed? guest: bonds are needed on eminent domain just because the federal government and the state governments can overreach. even if just compensation is given, just compensation is defined by the supreme court as only fair market value. homeowners who live in a or are running a business are sell their business immediately or sell their home immediately simply because someone is offering them the current rate for that home. their own subjective values and the place where their family has lived. they have values in the place their customers are used to

coming to. they have customized their homes. they have customize their businesses. they have to relocate. they have to pay lots of money to build new connections with professionals, physicians and the like. for most people, just compensation does not with them in the place they were before and so it is important to lemon -- to limit eminent domain and cases it is called for. caller: wouldn't that be a type of servitude unto the people not just the property? guest: can you explain that a servitude,er: title 18, -- it is in voluntary action. it would subject the people to be in involuntary servitude and defending the action. guest: first of all, if someone

does contest condemnation and if they contest the amount they receive in just compensation, typically, they will get attorneys fees so that is some help. takestely, eminent domain land away from owners without the owner's consent. in justification behind it appropriate cases is if you own land and precisely the place or you owna fort land in the middle of a narrow valley through which a transcontinental railroad or built, thatd be individual landowner would be in a position to hold the government up to get the lions share of the benefit from the entire project. in order to prevent that, it is necessary to take the land away without the owner's consent. built,the constitution thoughtt done only in narrow

and appropriate cases. host: typically, who decides what is just compensation? guest: the agency that takes the land and will offer to make a payment. if the owner accepted, that is the end. don'tccepted because they think they can win or don't want to fight. if the owner consists -- contests the amount of compensation, the court decides. host: let's go to our caller in hartford -- north deferred, connecticut on our republican line. done only in narrow and appropriate cases. you, i lived near new london and i was outraged and i'm still outraged by the taking of the land of those people who lived near the water. when you live near the water, it andar more valuable increase is invaluable single

year and when those people might that robert j, they have been thinking that 20 years, the value of the land would have increased tremendously and maybe they might put their retirement or wanted to leave it for their children for retirement. the fair market value at the london took that property is not anywhere near what it will be worth in 10-15- owns those lovely homes will need it for their retirement or leave it to their children. nothing has been done with that property, by the way. it is still sitting there. theory, just compensation should take into account full current value which a good appraiser will come up with by looking at the future uses of the land as well. if the land is going to be more lu

of people planning a retirement or planning a place for their children. that is lost. i would like to ask possibly this caller something we should all think about -- the pfizer pharmaceutical company had been the largest private employer in the city of ann arbor, michigan. they left ann arbor because they had to move to new london so people in ann arbor art left in the lurch. i don't know if the people in new london were upset about that. a new business comes in with government subsidies and now it happened to them. theory, just compensation should take into the point is that most people don't think about these problem son till it happens to them. companies,e issue of one newspaper writes about a pipeline --

i guess the design of this pipeline involves declaring eminent domain in a number of places. guest: yes, of the three traditional uses of eminent domain, the last of them was for regulated common carriers of which railroads and pipelines are illustrations. many states have given the power ,f eminent domain to railroads pipelines, sometimes to electric utility companies.

you don't have to be a government to exercise eminent domain as long as you can authorized by the government. host: virginia on our democrats line. hi, my name is kristin and i was in your property law class about four years ago and i thoroughly enjoyed it and was happy to hear you on the radio this morning. i am calling because i was wondering -- since the kelo decision -- how have courts considered it and how has it been expanded? properties have been taken for private use that only have incidental benefits like a greater tax revenue to the area or to the county. have you seen a great expansion of the kelo doctrine? guest: thank you for your kind words about my class. the supreme court has not followed through on its promises. case, justice roberts said the court would be policing

the situation to make sure there was not abuse of eminent domain and justice kennedy was the wrote fifth vote in kelo separately saying there would be certain kinds of situations where there should be a heightened standard of scrutiny for courts to overlook these things. in fact, it has not happened. many courts like the ones in new york state essentially rubberstamped eminent domain. there was a case a few years ago involving columbia university which had done a blight study. the state redevelopment corporation condemned the the land for columbia. the intermediate court found that this was done with a dash for the private benefit of columbia not the public in highest court of appeals chastised the appellate judge for going outside the

agency's own record and indicated strongly that they would defer to local officials. host: what was the vote on the kelo decision. guest: it was 5-4. good morning, thank you for taking my call. i was wondering what your thoughts are about down the zoning --dwon-zoning. i live in fairfax county and our zoned property wasdown from 200 acres down to one acre density. zoned to require five acres upon which to build a house. anticipation of the that was required to put

the fairfax county property through our land. on either side of the land, there were 15 homes that were half acre density. youthful vacant piece of land and it was worth so much. 1 acre lots.200 a voice didch of you get? were you able to protest the decision? caller: the saddest thing about this is that it was done three months after my fathered died in 1982. at that point, he was leading - anyway,gainst the it was just done. what was to be an extremely valuable parcel of land and it was the corner of west ox road

where it met lee highway -- guest: this is a very typical kind of problem. you have a community and. thereof the land is built and the people there would like the rest of the lambs to remain open space because they like to look at it and they don't want traffic congestion. their houses are more desired and worth more so as far as the other people concerned, it is a win-win situation and the losers are people like eric caller who find that their land suddenly is worth less than they thought it was. host: the headline of " the wall street journal" -- with the rebound of the housing market and the increasing number of new units being built, are we seeing an uptick in the number andminent domain cases

zoning cases where areas are being re-zoned for higher density housing? guest: we are not seeing an uptick in eminent domain cases. states that traditionally have used a lot of eminent domain are, for the most part, continuing to do so. most states do not. kay's sensitize people and local officials are being of takingul and terms land that belongs to families as opposed to businesses. host: grand rapids, ohio is up next. on our democrats line. caller: this law has been in effect since the beginning of our time. of this law chances ever being revised so it would not hurt the public so much? there are many cases that have hurt the public. host: what has congress done since the kelo decision in terms

of eminent domain? hearings in were the senate judiciary committee after the case. i was one of the witnesses that sat next to susan kelo, in fact. over the years, congress has had many bills that were proposed, lots of legislation considered it ultimately, congress did very little, almost nothing, in fact. at the state level, those states which did not use touch eminent domain titans their law as a statesof kelo and those where was used aggressively aggressively like new york and california and new jersey did not. host: that hearing a couple of years ago on capitol hill is in our video library at www.c- span.org. illinois, thomas, independent line. morning, with homes being underwater, how would that work?

doesn't that get kind of ridiculous when people bought the houses, it is like i heart -- as soon as you drive the car off, you are underwater. the kind of affects everybody in the long-run because they could buy a house for $150,000 that is worth $200,000. they can just pass it on to everybody else across the country. guest: the caller raises a good point -- we expect to depreciate rather quickly. people thought home prices could only go up. in 2006, they discovered that was wrong. you had many houses going underwater. is that theof this city of richmond and other cities that might engage in such purchases will try to seize mortgages, will try to claim the

fair market value of the house , thenour illustration they will say that it will take you so long to get the house for closed on because of our complex foreclosure rules. in the meantime, the house will stay vacant and it may get damaged by vandals. is worth $200,000 in the market, it is only worth 150,000 dollars to you as a practical matter. it's all we are going to give you. the house sometimes a still being -- the mortgages sometimes still being paid. host: the people in this richmond case who are current on these mortgages is what you see. whot: one problem is people are current on their mortgages may well continue to make their payments and the fact that their houses now underwater is academic. as far as the lender is concerned, as long as they they are getting paid, there is no reason to write down the mortgage at all.

second, lenders have portfolios of mortgages. there is something in eminent domain law called severance damages. the government takes part of someone's land and the rest of it is damaged, let's say the government takes both land along the road and leaves the interior part, the interior part is worth less because it does not have frontage on the main road anymore. the government has to pay for that severance damage in the industry is arguing that when you take certain loans out of a portfolio, you are not balancing the portfolio and destroying lender expectations. to severanceead damages as well, they say, making the case more complex in the city of richmond would have it. host: we will go next to illinois, on our independent line. iller: hello, my husband and went through two eminent domain cases.

they are extremely difficult. we had a beautiful home on lake michigan. the state of illinois said they wanted to add to the state park. our neighbors and all of us went through it, a very difficult time. it seems as though the state appraisers were told how to appraise the house. us -- i didn'tve feel -- a fair market value. host: what year was that? caller: dear me -- the 1950s. they, of course, succeeded in buying it and added it to the state park that they have not developed it.

it is just vacant land. some of the transient people, homeless people, go and camp out. you are almost afraid to walk there without a large dog. host: how about the second incident you mentioned? the second incident happened in the city of chicago and that's even more interesting. lawfather-in-law's father-in- built the home. it was his honeymoon cottage when he immigrated from sweden to the united states. box candy factory wanted the land for a parking lot. you could not deal with them with a fair price. they joined up with the city of chicago. so they could use the law of eminent domain to take the property and said it was a different era to neighborhood.

said it was a deteriorating neighborhood. they were to take everything at a low price. my father-in-law was elderly and it was a terrible thing for him because he had his favorite church or his entire life. he was quite elderly. host: thank you for sharing your stories with us. guest: the caller has called our attention to an important current problem which is that after the kelo case, it crave a aeen light -- it gave greenlight to takings in a fair number of localities. local officials are working hand in glove with re-developers, re- developers come up with i he is for parcels they would like to redevelop at a profit, they point these out to the local officials, the local officials then save the land is lighted and, in many places, there were

low standards for blight. there were things like an efficient street layout or too many parcels in the neighborhood. it is grounds for condemnation for blight. so the city condemns the land and transfers it free of these obligations or interests to the favorite re-developer. this is a really egregious example of crony capitalism. there is her stories, an emotional attachment to both of those pieces of property. it sounds like any amount of money cannot really solve. this is really what public use has to be limited. it is not simply a matter of dollars and cents. you are talking about people's homes and their families. host: wyoming, on our democrats line. government --e our government is not approved yet.ey stone xl pipeline

in texas, there is a 78-year-old had 300 acres or more and she was protesting because they are already using eminent domain to plow through her lame for this keystone pipeline that supposedly is not produced by our government. how does that happen? guest: eminent domain is usually a function of state and local governments. the state approves the condemnation. the state can do that. the federal courts usually have an ability to police the process although they rarely exercise that. most condemnation is done at the local and state level. massachusetts, on our independent line. caller: i went through this three years ago. and our local utility. they wanted my property.

they wanted construction right away and they refused to pay. it cost me $26,000 to fight it in court. the lawyers i hired had no idea what i was talking about. they had no idea. says you cannot use your land on your farm -- to grow crops, i am entitled to compensation. am i correct? guest: you are entitled to compensation if your land is taken. many jurisdictions have so- statutesick tajke which means rather than take your land and have the judge figure out a fair price, many states allow governments to take your lands now and then there has to be a lawsuit later and only later do you get paid. you should get interest but that's not quite the same. host: so you are still in the whole $26,000? lawyers andbet,

appraisers. they had no idea what they were doing. host: thanks for sharing your story. " the star tribune" in minnesota -- guest: this is exactly the kind of abuse that justice of con or's dissenting opinion in kelo is all about. government can always think of some white that theoretically is a better use of your land and will get more taxes for the

local government. if that is true, government always has a right to take your land and justice o'connor's words, you can take a motel six and make it into a ritz-carlton. host: california, last comment. the profit should be shared by the original owner or, with the economy as it is, there should be some assurance that this perceived tax increase, make that developer put a bond out. years that they can guarantee the profits for the taxpayer that the eminent domain is being used for. just -- you don't just take someone's ancestral property for profit. me butit sounds great to on the other hand, none of the

justices in kelo bought the idea that government should have to guarantee that things would work out well. steven eagle, professor of law at george mason university in virginia. you can reach him on twitter. thanks for being with us this morning and talking about eminent domain. that will do it for this "orning's washington journal next, we will take you live to the national press club where they will be recognizing out going homeland security secretary jenna not a ton of who is stepping down from her position, taking the chair as president of the university of california. live coverage is next on c-span. host